Search

Background: Randomised controlled trials, and in particular those of psychosocial interventions, often fail to recruit to target, resulting in underpowered trials with poor generalisability of findings. The objectives of this study were to explore the views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to psychosocial research studies, and to explore their views on factors that may hinder or facilitate recruitment.Methods: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews, with healthcare professionals who had been involved in recruitment into a randomised controlled trial of a talking therapy for depression in patients with advanced cancer. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis.Results: Five primary themes were identified, comprised of 11 subthemes. Attitudes towards research were largely positive. Health care professionals identified lack of time and narrow screening criteria as barriers to recruitment, and also noted the tendency to withhold participants from research for reasons other than eligibility (e.g., gatekeeping). The engagement of the study team with the clinical recruitment site, and the frequent presence of a researcher in clinics, were noted as facilitating recruitment.Conclusions: Healthcare professionals involved in recruiting to trials of psychosocial interventions hold generally positive views of psychosocial research. However, they report that constraints including space and time limit their ability to recruit, and express anxieties about approaching patients for trial recruitment in the palliative phase of their illness. The findings from this study can inform how best to design trials, and in particular trials of psychosocial interventions, and train health care professionals for the study, to maximise recruitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression is one of the most common mental disorders in people with advanced cancer. Although cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) has been shown to be effective for depression in people with cancer, it is unclear whether this is the case for people with advanced cancer and depression.Aims: We sought to determine whether CBT is more clinically effective than treatment as usual (TAU) for treating depression in people with advanced cancer (trial registration number ISRCTN07622709).Method: A multi-centre, parallel-group single-blind randomised controlled trial comparing TAU with CBT (plus TAU). Participants (n = 230) with advanced cancer and depression were randomly allocated to (a) up to 12 sessions of individual CBT or (b) TAU. The primary outcome measure was the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Secondary outcome measures included the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, and Satisfaction with Care.Results: Multilevel modelling, including complier-average intention-to-treat analysis, found no benefit of CBT. CBT delivery was proficient, but there was no treatment effect (-0.84, 95% CI -2.76 to 1.08) or effects for secondary measures. Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested an effect of CBT on the BDI-II in those widowed, divorced or separated (-7.21, 95% CI -11.15 to -3.28).Conclusions: UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend CBT for treating depression. Delivery of CBT through the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme has been advocated for long-term conditions such as cancer. Although it is feasible to deliver CBT through IAPT proficiently to people with advanced cancer, this is not clinically effective. CBT for people widowed, divorced or separated needs further exploration. Alternate models of CBT delivery may yield different results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prevalence of depressive disorder in adults with advanced cancer is around 20 %. Although cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is recommended for depression and may be beneficial in depressed people with cancer, its use for depression in those with advanced disease for whom cure is not likely has not been explored.Methods: People aged 18 years and above with advanced cancer attending General Practitioner (GP), oncology or hospice outpatients from centres across England will be screened to establish a DSM-IV diagnosis of depression. Self-referral is also accepted. Eligible consenters will be randomised to a single blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of the addition to treatment as usual (TAU) of up to 12 one-hour weekly sessions of manualised CBT versus TAU alone. Sessions are delivered in primary care through Increasing Access to Psychological Care (IAPT) service, and the manual includes a focus on issues for people approaching the end of life. The main outcome is the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Subsidiary measures include the Patient Health Questionnaire, quality of life measure EQ-5D, Satisfaction with care, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status and a modified Client Service Receipt Inventory. At 90 % power, we require 240 participants to enter the trial. Data will be analysed using multi-level (hierarchical) models for data collected at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 weeks. Cost effectiveness analysis will incorporate costs related to the intervention to compare overall healthcare costs and QALYs between the treatment arms. We will conduct qualitative interviews after final follow-up on patient and therapist perspectives of the therapy.Discussion: This trial will provide data on the clinical and cost effectiveness of CBT for people with advanced cancer and depression. We shall gain an understanding of the feasibility of delivering care to this group through IAPT. Our findings will provide evidence for policy-makers, commissioners and clinicians in cancer and palliative care, and in the community.Trial Registration: Controlled Trials ISRCTN07622709 , registered 15 July 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: the aims of this review were (i) to identify quality-of-life (QoL) measures which have had their measurement properties validated in people residing in care homes or nursing homes, and to critically compare and summarise these instruments and (ii) to make recommendations for measurement instruments.Methods: bibliographic databases PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL and Embase were searched for articles evaluating measurement properties of QoL instruments in people residing in care homes. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments checklist. Measurement properties of instruments were appraised using a systematic checklist.Results: the search strategy resulted in 3252 unique citations, of which 15 articles were included in this review. These articles assessed 13 instruments, 8 of which were dementia or Alzheimer specific instruments. The QUALIDEM, a dementia-specific observational instrument, had the widest array of information available on its measurement properties, which were mostly satisfactory. Most measurement instruments lacked information on hypotheses testing and content validity. Information on responsiveness and measurement error was not available for any instrument.Conclusions: for people with dementia living in care homes, the QUALIDEM is recommended for measuring QoL. For residents without dementia, we recommend Kane et al.'s Psychosocial Quality of Life Domains questionnaire. Studies of higher methodological quality, assessing a wider range of measurement properties are needed to allow a more fully informed choice of QoL instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older people are vulnerable to sustained high levels of psychosocial distress following a crime. A cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-informed psychological therapy, the Victim Improvement Package (VIP) may aid recovery. The VIP trial aims to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the VIP for alleviating depressive and anxiety symptoms in older victims of crime.Methods/design: People aged 65 years or more who report being a victim of crime will be screened by Metropolitan Police Service Safer Neighbourhood Teams within a month of the crime for distress using the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-2. Those who screen positive will be signposted to their GP for assistance, and re-screened at 3 months. Participants who screen positive for depression and/or anxiety at re-screening are randomised to a CBT informed VIP added to treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone. The intervention consists of 10 individual 1-h sessions, delivered weekly by therapists from the mental health charity Mind. The primary outcome measure is the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), used as a composite measure, assessed at 6 months after the crime (post therapy) with a 9-month post-crime follow-up. Secondary outcome measures include the EQ-5D, and a modified Client Service Receipt Inventory. A total of 226 participants will be randomised VIP:TAU with a ratio 1:1, in order to detect a standardised difference of at least 0.5 between groups, using a mixed-effects linear-regression model with 90% power and a 5% significance level (adjusting for therapist clustering and potential drop-out). A cost-effectiveness analysis will incorporate intervention costs to compare overall health care costs and quality of life years between treatment arms. An embedded study will examine the impact of past trauma and engagement in safety behaviours and distress on the main outcomes.Discussion: This trial should provide data on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a CBT-informed psychological therapy for older victims of crime with anxiety and/or depressive symptoms and should demonstrate a model of integrated cross-agency working. Our findings should provide evidence for policy-makers, commissioners and clinicians responding to the needs of older victims of crime.Trial Registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number, ID: ISRCTN16929670. Registered on 3 August 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]